Bias in the media

Let's compare these two quotes:


“This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.”



vs.



“This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.” Then the dispatcher asked, “O.K., and this guy — is he white, black or Hispanic?” Only then did Mr. Zimmerman say, “He looks black.”


Source: http://themoderatevoice.com/143625/n...man-tape-edit/




Hmmm... does anyone see any bias in the way NBC edited that phone conversation?



And let's not forget the extremely outdated photos of Trayvon the media has been using to make the public feel sympathetic:



"In an extraordinary show of bias, this picture has been the face of Trayvon Martin in the media.

Trayvon looks to be, I don’t know, maybe 12 years old in this pic? Now, the MSM certainly has no obligation to use the most up to date pictures of anyone, but when you use a childhood picture of someone who is almost a man in a case like this, it presents a false image to the public. That’s very relevant given George Zimmerman’s story.

Trayvon Martin threatened and beat George Zimmerman, Zimmerman’s father said tonight in an exclusive interview on WOFL-Channel 35.

“Trayvon Martin said something to the effect of ‘you’re going to die now’ or ‘you’re going die tonight,’ ” Robert Zimmerman told WOFL’s Valerie Boey. “He continued to beat George, and at some point, George pulled his pistol and did what he did.”

Nobody would buy the idea that the kid in that picture said, “you’re going to die now” and attacked an adult. It just doesn’t seem plausible...

The fact that Trayvon Martin is flipping off the camera doesn’t mean George Zimmerman is innocent or that Martin deserved to get shot, but again, it undercuts the entire picture that the mainstream media has been painting. Trayvon Martin isn’t a little kid, he was far from an angel, and yes, it is entirely possible that George Zimmerman is telling the truth about what happened. Maybe Trayvon did foolishly choose to attack him and Zimmerman shot him because he had good reason to believe that his life was in danger. We simply don’t have enough information yet to know for sure who was right and who was wrong.

We do, however, have enough information to say that making this tragic and incredibly ambiguous situation into some sort of national test case for whether black Americans can get justice in the Obama era was incredibly foolish. This case is anything BUT simple or clearcut and anyone pretending that it is, is either misinformed or doesn’t care much about the truth."


In the magically yummy words of Obama: “I can only imagine what these parents are going through,” he said, “and when I think about this boy, I think about my own kids. And you know, I think every parent in America should be able to understand why it is absolutely imperative that we investigate every aspect of this.” He added later: “You know, if I had a son, he would look like Trayvon.”

Imagine what the media would have said had McCain been president and Trayvon had been white, and he had said: "You know, if I had a son, he would look like Trayvon."

A double standard? I think so.

What it does show us is the "mainstream" media is extremely biased and leftist and will lie about anything to support its own agenda.

Actually, if it were the other way around, the black kid would be charged with murder immediately, before it was ever brought to media attention. Media bias is apparent and consequently affects the ignorant. Human bias is real, sometimes subversive, and can affect anyone, say for example a 17-year-old black boy in a hoodie.

Yeah, that's right, don't answer the question because it is so obvious and blatant this time, you can't deny it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 999969999

Yeah, that's right, don't answer the question because it is so obvious and blatant this time, you can't deny it.

---

There was an answer to your question in there, I just didn't word my response to elementary students.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 999969999

A double standard? I think so.

What it does show us is the "mainstream" media is I am extremely biased and leftist and will lie about anything to support its my own agenda.

---

So you want to counter the "biased" media by quoting Zimmerman's totally impartial father as a source?
Our media isn't biased, it's lazy and stupid...pretty much a reflection of the populace it panders to.

Did anyone notice that Zimmerman didn't really even look like a white guy?

I mean there was all this uproar about a white guy killing a black guy, but he looks like a Hispanic guy, not a white guy.

That wouldn't fit the media's leftist agenda, so they continued to call him white.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 999969999

Did anyone notice that Zimmerman didn't really even look like a white guy?

I mean there was all this uproar about a white guy killing a black guy, but he looks like a Hispanic guy, not a white guy.

That wouldn't fit the media's leftist agenda, so they continued to call him white.

---

To me, he seemed like a racist, what else do I need?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 999969999

Did anyone notice that Zimmerman didn't really even look like a white guy?

I mean there was all this uproar about a white guy killing a black guy, but he looks like a Hispanic guy, not a white guy.

That wouldn't fit the media's leftist agenda, so they continued to call him white.

---

Gee, I wonder if he was Hispanic (preferably undocumented), who's agenda that would play into?
I'm thinking if there was a whiff of "other" about Zimmerman, Faux would be jizzing all over the airwaves.

What if we were as racist as them?

For example, what if we had our own N.A.A.C.P.? The National Association for the Advancement of Caucasian People? What do you think the media would do with that one?

What about Chicanos Por La Causa? If we had Whites For The Cause? Would they ignore our membership in it?

How about La Raza? What if we had The White Race? Would they say it is okay for a Supreme Court Justice to be a member of that organization?

Why isn't the same standard of racism applied equally to all races?

Doesn't seem fair to me.



And look how they stereotyped my people...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44mAqe16iBM


Would they get away with this now if they stereotyped Hispanics or African Americans in a movie? I don't think so. But for some reason, it's still okay to do it to germanic people.

I knew Aryans were humorless, wasn't aware they were so thin skinned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 999969999

For example, what if we had our own N.A.A.C.P.? The National Association for the Advancement of Caucasian People? What do you think the media would do with that one?

---

You do: (Check out the last one) :whistling

• American Renaissance
• American Third Position Party
• American Nazi PartyFounding Fathers.
• Aryan Nations
• Council of Conservative Citizens, is an American political organization that supports a large variety of conservative and paleoconservative causes in addition to white separatism.[37]
• National Association for the Advancement of White People, is a white supremacist organization in the United States incorporated on December 14, 1953 in Delaware by Bryant Bowles which presents itself as a civil rights organization such as the NAACP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 999969999

For example, what if we had our own N.A.A.C.P.? The National Association for the Advancement of Caucasian People? What do you think the media would do with that one?

---

You do.
It's called the GOP.

Ignoring the plethora of white establishment and white organizations, here's a serious question. 9, do you know what the N.A.A.C.P. is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darth Sushi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 999969999

For example, what if we had our own N.A.A.C.P.? The National Association for the Advancement of Caucasian People? What do you think the media would do with that one?

---

You do: (Check out the last one) :whistling

• American Renaissance
• American Third Position Party
• American Nazi PartyFounding Fathers.
• Aryan Nations
• Council of Conservative Citizens, is an American political organization that supports a large variety of conservative and paleoconservative causes in addition to white separatism.[37]
• National Association for the Advancement of White People, is a white supremacist organization in the United States incorporated on December 14, 1953 in Delaware by Bryant Bowles which presents itself as a civil rights organization such as the NAACP.

---

You conveniently ignored this part of my question:

"What do you think the media would do with that one?"

For example, if Romney was a member of one of those organizations, would the media ignore it? Would they try to sweep it under the carpet like they did with Obama's Reverend Wright? With Obama's ties to the Nation of Islam?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 999969999

For example, if Romney was a member of one of those organizations, would the media ignore it? Would they try to sweep it under the carpet like they did with Obama's Reverend Wright? With Obama's ties to the Nation of Islam?

---

I see, you're not interested in the way things are, but instead in yapping speculation. Oh wait, I already knew that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mjmacky

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 999969999

For example, if Romney was a member of one of those organizations, would the media ignore it? Would they try to sweep it under the carpet like they did with Obama's Reverend Wright? With Obama's ties to the Nation of Islam?

---

I see, you're not interested in the way things are, but instead in yapping speculation. Oh wait, I already knew that.

---

As I would expect from the Left, you won't answer a question which you find uncomfortable.

It's okay for the media to ignore the fact that Obama listened to the racist, America-hating rants of Rev. Wright for 20 years. The media sweeps that under the carpet. The same thing with ACORN. They turn a blind eye to it and ignore it.

If Romney had been a member of a racist white group, the media would jump all over his ass about it and never let go of it.

Nords are racists, carry it from there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 999969999

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darth Sushi

You do: (Check out the last one) :whistling

• American Renaissance
• American Third Position Party
• American Nazi PartyFounding Fathers.
• Aryan Nations
• Council of Conservative Citizens, is an American political organization that supports a large variety of conservative and paleoconservative causes in addition to white separatism.[37]
• National Association for the Advancement of White People, is a white supremacist organization in the United States incorporated on December 14, 1953 in Delaware by Bryant Bowles which presents itself as a civil rights organization such as the NAACP.

---

You conveniently ignored this part of my question:

"What do you think the media would do with that one?"

For example, if Romney was a member of one of those organizations, would the media ignore it? Would they try to sweep it under the carpet like they did with Obama's Reverend Wright? With Obama's ties to the Nation of Islam?

---

It doesn't really matter because your posting indicates you're just venting your frustration about your favorite GOP candidate being supposedly under constant attack by the liberal media. People who see conspiracies everywhere are mentally challenged. Medication is your only salvation buddy. Although you'll probably deny it, you sound exactly like a birther! Aren't you? :yup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darth Sushi

It doesn't really matter because your posting indicates you're just venting your frustration about your favorite GOP candidate being supposedly under constant attack by the liberal media. People who see conspiracies everywhere are mentally challenged. Medication is your only salvation buddy. Although you'll probably deny it, you sound exactly like a birther! Aren't you? :yup:

---

Rather, he's someone who can just manage to regurgitate this spunk without losing a will to live.

Speaking of "biased media", I wonder why the mainstream liberal rags haven't jumped on a story just broadcast by Rush Limbaugh.
Turns out that the new Batman film features a villain named Bane and Rush has discovered that this is an attempt to smear Romney..."Bane" = "Bain".
The whole film is just a Hollywood attempt to smear the presumptive Republican candidate by equating Romney's sterling work as a vulture capitalist/tax evader with a psychopathic killer.

It's so obvious I'm sure the movie will tank because no Republicans will go see it.
How is this not front page of the New York Times?

OMG, there was a shooting in Colorado at a batman premiere. 666-boy will probably proclaim the liberal media coverage is an attempt to weaken the gun laws. :rolleyes:

The liberal media has done it again!

By DYLAN BYERS |
7/20/12 11:11 AM EDT

ABC News and Brian Ross are apologizing for an "incorrect" report that James Holmes, the suspect in the Colorado theater shooting, may have had connections to the Tea Party.

"An earlier ABC News broadcast report suggested that a Jim Holmes of a Colorado Tea Party organization might be the suspect, but that report was incorrect," ABC News said in a statement. "ABC News and Brian Ross apologize for the mistake, and for disseminating that information before it was properly vetted."


In a similar statement released minutes earlier, ABC News said the report was "incorrect" but did not include the apology. "Several other local residents with similar names were also contacted via social media by members of the public who mistook them for the suspect," the initial statement read.

ABC's apology comes after Ross reported this morning that there is "a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado, page on the Colorado Tea party site... talking about him joining the Tea Party last year."

"Now, we don't know if this is the same Jim Holmes," Ross cautioned "but it's Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado."

ABC News is the only network or cable news channel to suggest a possible Tea Party connection, which Ross based off a single Tea Party Patriots webpage that has the name "Jim Holmes."


Once again, another great example of the leftist bias in the media against conservatives such as the Tea Party.

The individual is responsible for his own actions. No one made him do it. He should be prosecuted, convicted, and then sentenced for his own actions.

It is amazing how they try to link the Tea Party, a non-violent group opposed to taxes and wasteful government spending to something horrible like this. The Tea Party began during the Bush administration when he signed the bailout for Wall Street. It is not a racist, nor a violent organization. It does not promote the overthrow of the government and the capitalist system like the Occupy Wall Street group does. Do not confuse the two of them. They are very different groups with very different agendas and methods. The Tea Party merely wants to vote liberals out of office. At the ballot box. The ballot box is the Tea Party's only weapon. The Tea Party wants us to go back to a strict constructionist view of the U.S. Constitution where the government had limited powers, and it wants the government to stop spending so much money and stop raising taxes. Oh how awful, right? What a terrible group, right?

This is just like when "Sheriff Doofy" of Pima County tried to blame conservative talk radio for the Tucson shooting.

http://i917.photobucket.com/albums/a...r9/doofy-9.jpg

By declaring Arizona a “mecca for racism and bigotry” and blaming heated rhetoric on the right for the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik gave voice to those looking for a cause of Saturday’s violence.

With Democratic party leaders for the most part showing restraint in their comments following the shootings, Dupnik expressed at a news conference Saturday night in Tucson what many liberals were thinking, but hadn’t yet said.

“Let me say one thing, because people tend to pooh-pooh this business about all the vitriol that we hear inflaming the American public by people who make a living off of doing that,” the sheriff said during a press conference. “That may be free speech, but it’s not without consequences.”

During an interview earlier in the day that aired on MSNBC via local NBC affiliate KPNX, Dupnik declared that “it’s time that this country take a little introspective look at the crap that comes out on radio and TV.”

The seven-term sheriff and Bisbee native is well known in Arizona for speaking his mind and has established himself as one of the leading liberal voices in a state that boasts only a handful.

Dupnik, 73, supported Giffords during her campaigns for congress and attracted headlines last spring as one of the most prominent opponents of the state’s controversial immigration law, S.B. 1070, which was signed by GOP Gov. Jan Brewer. Though the policy has been blocked from implementation by a federal court order, Dupnik vowed that he wouldn’t enforce the “racist” law.

On any other day, a warning from a county sheriff — even one known to the national media — to cool overheated talk show chatter wouldn’t have moved the needle much. But with the political class at a total loss over the tragedy and the left aching from the attack on one of their own, Dupnik’s comments have carried outsized weight in driving Saturday’s dialogue.

MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann called Dupnik’s word “extraordinary” in a special Saturday night edition of “Countdown,” and highlighted the sheriff’s media criticism on Twitter.

In a special comment later in the program, Olbermann linked the incident to Giffords being identified last year as one of former Alaska GOP Gov. Sarah Palin’s 20 “targets” for the November election, identified by a website showing crosshairs around 20 Democratic districts.

“This morning in Arizona, this age in which this country would accept “targeting” of political opponents and putting bullseyes over their faces and of the dangerous blurring between political rallies and gun shows, ended,” the liberal host said.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories...#ixzz21GCDDbdP

And yet again, conservatives had nothing to do with it. Nobody told him to do what he did. He is responsible for his own actions. He is an individual. Individualism is a concept which seems to be lost on liberals. They always want to blame a community for the actions of one person. They see things only in terms of groups. It should be pointed out that Loughner was actually a liberal, not a conservative, but that doesn't matter to the media. They ignored that fact.

"Caitie Parker, a singer/songwriter from Oro Valley, AZ, says that she knows Jared Loughner, the gunman that shot 19 people in Tucson, Arizona, on Saturday, January 8th. She really hoped it wasn’t the same guy she went to high school with several years earlier, as he had been a really good friend. Not only did she go to high school with him, but college as well and was in a band with him. “There were 5-6 of us that hung out” in high school. Unfortunately, it was.

At that time, she said, he was very philosophical and leaned to the ‘left.’ She said, “For the Bush/Kerry election we all wore “1 term president” buttons. That election was HUGE to us.”

He had actually met Gabrielle Giffords in ‘07, and after asking her a question, told Caitie later that Gifford was “stupid and unintelligent.” The question he asked Giffords, Caitie said, “was odd & didn’t make sense, I can’t remember what it was. Just know it was weird.” The last time she had seen him in person was in 2007, in a sign language class.

Contrary to the opinion of several bloggers following the shooting, there is no evidence that Sarah Palin or Glenn Beck had any influence on Loughner. On the contrary, according to Caitie, at the time she knew him, he was left wing, quite liberal, and “oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy.” “He wore shirts & bracelets about it. & liked to discuss 2012 w/ everyone!”

Their group was “liberal in wanting to change the way the world was run, we both wanted to. He took it to an extreme I never would’ve.” She said he was a “political radical” long before the teaparty, Glenn Beck, or Sarah Palin came on the scene.

Caitie also said he was a pot head and was into the music of Hendrix, The Doors, and Anti-Flag. “We listened to political punk in high school & agreed with their leftist opinions for the most part. Anti-Flag was our band.”

She states that he adhered to the “straight edge” beliefs of Anti-flag for the first few years of High School, but “Junior year & on, no.”When she knew him, he had lot of friends, smoked pot, and dated girls, “until he got alcohol poisoning” in 2006 and dropped out of school. After that, he became very reclusive and was mainly a loner.

There is NO evidence that he was influenced by conservatives, but there is good evidence he was influenced by socialists. His MySpace page, for example, listed... The Communist Manifesto as some of his favorite books."


Now let's examine a group which actually called for violence, but the media and the government prosecutors looked the other way, and swept it under the carpet...

Over the weekend, members of the New Black Panther Party showed just how tense the situation in the Trayvon Martin shooting has gotten: They offered a $10,000 bounty for the capture of George Zimmerman, who shot and killed the unarmed teenager.

The Orlando Sentinel reports that Mikhail Muhammad announced the reward during a protest on Saturday, and when a Sentinel reporter asked if he was inciting violence, Muhammad said, "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."

Nationally the shooting death has brought up questions about whether Zimmerman, who was on a Neighborhood Watch patrol, profiled Martin and whether Sanford police's failure to arrest Zimmerman had to do with racism.

The New Black Panther's bounty just heightens that narrative.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, the New Black Panther Party has been rejected by the Black Panther Party of the '60s and '70s. The SPLC says the group is "a virulently racist and anti-Semitic organization whose leaders have encouraged violence against whites, Jews and law enforcement officers..."

The Sentinel also reported that the group "called for the mobilization of 10,000 black men to capture Zimmerman."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/...orge-zimmerman




Is there a leftist bias in the media? Obviously, yes.

I encourage you to open your mind, liberals, and read this book:

Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind
Book Description
Publication Date: July 19, 2011
Dr. Tim Groseclose, a professor of political science and economics at UCLA, has spent years constructing precise, quantitative measures of the slant of media outlets. He does this by measuring the political content of news, as a way to measure the PQ, or “political quotient” of voters and politicians.

Among his conclusions are: (i) all mainstream media outlets have a liberal bias; and (ii) while some supposedly conservative outlets—such the Washington Times or Fox News’ Special Report—do lean right, their conservative bias is less than the liberal bias of most mainstream outlets.

Groseclose contends that the general leftward bias of the media has shifted the PQ of the average American by about 20 points, on a scale of 100, the difference between the current political views of the average American, and the political views of the average resident of Orange County, California or Salt Lake County, Utah. With Left Turn readers can easily calculate their own PQ—to decide for themselves if the bias exists. This timely, much-needed study brings fact to this often overheated debate.

Condense this into your your words please.

I just didn't word my response to elementary students.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iqbal51

I just didn't word my response to elementary students.

---

Where and why did you dig this thread up and what the fuck are you talking about.

Zimmerman was probably a genuine person spooked overwhelmied by a black came mevous

Sensationalism is the tool for media these days. They can bend the truth until it breaks, and yet there is little comeback when they go over the top.

A few years back, The SUN published the identities and addresses for a number of known paedophiles, who then became harassed by locals in their own area, forcing many of them to move. Unfortunately, The SUN didn't bother to double check their data, and included individuals who were not paedophiles. Some were people who had the same name as a known paedophile, and some had just been taken from the phone book to bolster the number of names on offer.

Even though innocent people were driven from their homes by locals, including so called friends, The SUN never apologised, believing it had done the RIGHT THING.

A few years before that, The Hillsborough Disaster saw the deaths of nearly 100 fans, attributed to extremely poor policing, yet The SUN published a story that firmly put the blame at the feet of the Liverpool fans, and even stated that fans were looting the bodies of the dead and spitting on the emergency services trying to save lives. No one in Liverpool now reads The SUN, as they feel betrayed. The recent inquiry, some twenty years later, shows that not one fan was responsible for any deaths, but does show that the police tried to cover up their incompetence by altering statement etc.

For today's media, they are not interested in the truth. They want to sell papers, or airtime, and to sell it, they need to be popular, and to be popular, they need to sensationalise. Changing a story to give it a political or racial edge does just that. Creating a story that inflames a segment of the nation does just that. The film industry has been doing this for decades, for entertainment purposes, by we all know that films are fiction. To do this with real life events is not only immoral, but it should also be illegal. If you knowingly make a statement that is seen or heard by millions, which misrepresents the facts, you should go to prison.

The NBC producer should now be slopping out because what he did was to try and affect the opinions of millions, by distorting the facts. An innocent man may now appear guilty of murder. Only a trial should determine the innocence or guilt of an individual, not a media franchise.

In this case, the NBC producer tried to sway public opinion, and it could be argued that he was also trying to sway the legal system. Should someone not connected with the legal system be able to make such waves?